You looked great on my TV Saturday morning. Although, was it just me or was Hoda being kind of a sexist wanker?

Hoda was a doll, actually. She was actually familiar with the book, and she was really sweet to us. They were nice there.

I seriously hope that somebody will show up who saw the Fox News thing on Sunday morning, so that somebody other than me can sort of... explain what happened there when the chapter called "Good Girls Don't" was discussed. Because that? Was interesting.

I'm glad she was nice, it just looked like she was ignoring you and "talking-over-you" to Evan. It's a pet peeve I have from business meetings where people talk to my male boss, when I'm the one actually answering the questions.

I missed Fox on Sunday, but Dayside was freaky. There was one moment where the anchors were just, well, doing whatever the hell it was they were doing, and the look on your face was absolutely perfect.

At any rate - congrats on your junket.

Mm, yes, DaySide. Where we were on between the chihuahua races and the lady golfer. That was a little bit... I don't think I can improve on "freaky," actually.

We think the chihuahuas actually stole like a minute from us. Damn chihuahuas.

Yes. Chihuahua races. They're fast, but sneaky.

I had a hard time deciding whether the best part was the weirdass montage they were running while you were talking, the faces the guy was making behind the woman's head, the part where the woman admits to not actually having READ THE BOOK, or, well, the part where they just freaking LEFT THE STAGE in the middle of your interview.

But then, check your TIVO... The best part is actually your face the second time they show you, where you become the absolute personification of WTF???????

FoxNews - Dadaist news for the 21st century. I'm sorry I missed your Sunday appearance.

BUT - the Today appearance was actually pretty cool and good. You guys are both articulate and the book sounds awesome. You are now a published author, as God intended. I hope the masses come to want to know Why They are Still Single.

Amy

Well, if the neighborhood news is that slow, how come the police haven't called me back about my shrub burglary? You heard me. I live in Mac-Groveland, and somebody came in the middle of the night and dug up and absconded with two shrubs from right in front of my house. I thought St. Paul's finest would come up with sirens blaring, but not so much. They haven't even returned my phone call.

And I was holding up so well, too ... thanks for putting dashed hope into such fine words, and for honoring such a good, strong man.

He's not at all my particular type, but it really doesn't get much hotter than this picture right here.

I, too, was saddened when I heard the news, because I, too, thought he would get up and walk. I know it's cheesy and some people don't believe it, but I do find solace in the fact that he IS walking now, somewhere.

Thanks so much for this post. You just hit everything I thought about Christopher Reeve--

It's good to know that I wasn't the only person that admired what he did after being paralyzed and that so wanted him to get up and walk again. If for nothing else, than that he brought attention to something so other people could realize their dream too.

That was really beautiful writing. Thanks so much.

heart

Beautifully said, Linda. And yeah, the first two movies meant a lot to me as a kid. Richard Donner was never able to recapture the magic after those.

I had honestly just finished adding the John Williams theme to my new Superboy website that I'm starting when I read the news.

The man was only 52...what a terrible shame.

I finally signed up for typekey so that I could say thank you, Linda. I really, truly cried when I saw his name in the paper this morning--something I've never done over a celebrity. I guess I believed him, too. I just figured that one of these days I was going to turn on the tv and there he'd be--lurching, maybe, and being helped along, but walking. Thanks, again. He deserves such a wonderful rememberence.

You said everything I was thinking. I was another one who thought she'd see him get up and walk one day. I am sorry he didn't make it in his time here on Earth. I know he's walking, riding horses and flying wherever he is now.
Thank you for a wonderful tribute.

I hate to be a buzzkill here, but I beg to differ (politely, of course). Reeve was, like a lot of celebrities, somewhat arrogant. He was riding a horse and was getting braver and braver in what he would attempt. I don't know the terms when it comes to equestrian events, but I do know that he was injured when he attempted a move that he was advised not to by his instructor simply because his skill level was not appropriate. He did it anyway and was paralyzed at the age of 42.

With all due respect, I feel the more inspirational folks who really deserve us all looking up to them are the ones who had no choice in the matter (i.e., were born that way) and still soldiered on bravely. Not those who were blessed with a healthy body and were reckless with it.

I absolutely feel pity for Reeve and his family, but I don't admire him.

Well, would that we all were so perfect.

With all due respect in return, there's a time and a place for things, and the day after the guy dies might not be the time for potshots. He probably suffered enough to pay for the egregious mistake of misestimating his equestrian abilities.

Well, I don't want this to devolve because I certainly don't mean offense, but I have someone in my family who is paralyzed through no fault of his own and it just has always bothered me that Reeve was made out to be a hero, when I feel like he squandered a precious healthy life. Generally, I feel your site fosters debate and I was just putting in my opinion and trying to offer another viewpoint -- not taking "potshots," as you imply.

People make mistakes. They're not perfect. He had kids; he had a wife. I don't think he set out to "squander a precious healthy life." People make calls every day that carry some degree of risk -- the decision to drive to work carries a risk. The decision to go canoeing on vacation carries a risk. It's always possible to look back with perfect hindsight and say, "Shouldn't have done this; shouldn't have done that."

My admiration for people who do well in difficult situations isn't a zero-sum game. It's not admiring Christopher Reeve's handling of his circumstances or admiring someone else's handling of theirs. It's not a contest for who's the most worthy. Admiring Christopher Reeve doesn't consume admiration that would otherwise be spent on someone else. The man had a horrible thing happen to him, and like a lot of people who have horrible things happen to him, yes, you can look back and find ways he could have avoided it.

But he didn't. So there he was. And to me, the decisions he made after that point showed grace. Grace that is not degraded by the fact that he could probably have avoided being in that situation in the first place. I don't see what those two things have to do with each other. I don't see why I can't admire the course of action he took after a certain point in life, simply because I may be able to find fault with other things he did -- particularly where, to me, the finding of fault is miniscule compared to what he did that was admirable.

To me, the whole "he was arrogant, like most celebrities" bit is an unnecessary dig that really has nothing to do with anything, and it smacks of something kind of unfair. Many people who aren't celebrities do dangerous things because they're fun. People go mountain-climbing, they zing their snowmobiles around, and they generally do things that aren't entirely safe. I don't think it's fair to paint all those people as arrogant, nor do I think Reeve's tendency in that direction was there because he was a celebrity.

Should we all be more grateful for our precious and healthy days? Of course. Are any of us always as appreciative as we should be? No. Don't we all do things every day that reflect some failure to fully appreciate our situations in life? I know I do.

To me, it's people like Christopher Reeve -- or any person who holds up well in a very difficult set of circumstances -- who teach better than anyone else that it is important to be more grateful and more appreciative.

I just can't see him as some callow representation of celebrity worship. If he were beloved only for being paralyzed -- had he disappeared from the public eye after his injury and simply been seen in pictures, breathing through a tube -- I would see your point, in that being befallen by tragedy is not, in and of itself, heroic. But bearing up under its effects is heroic, whether or not I can go back and shake my head at all the ways it might have been avoided.

ehhh... I am glad that he's free again, but I think the real gift that Reeve provided all of us was how he opened up a dialogue and put a recognizable famous face on a branch of research and human life that was needed.

regardless of how he got in the chair, he was there, and fought to get himself out of it, and fought for others' chances as well. I think he even tried some experiemental procedures, which may end up being a stepping stone for another's progress.

Rather than sink into the background, he put himself out there because that's the best he could do for himself and others that haven't been as fortunate as he was.

He championed a cause, and I respect him for that.

I hope his family can find solace in that, and perhaps see someone else take their first steps.

I'm also a bit bothered by the idea that some people acquire a disability or an illness "through no fault of their own," and apparently the others somehow deserve it or brought it on themselves. (It feels similar, to me, to the describing of some with AIDS as "innocent" -- children particularly -- leaving the others apparently guilty.) As Linda said, it's not a zero-sum game: we can have sympathy for (or, when appropriate, admire) those in this situation, HOWEVER it happened.

Any of us might be construed as somehow "throwing away a healthy life" by dozens of choices we make every day: driving, eating junk occasionally, drinking sometimes, not exercising as much as is recommended, whatever.

Some have argued that Pat Tillman and Dale Earnhardt threw their lives away by getting themselves into high-risk situations.

I have never gotten involved in those arguements, because as much as I hate war and motor sports, those were choices that didn't put anybody at risk but the chooser.

That being said, in no way would I classify horse-jumping as high-risk, given that one is more likely to fall off a ladder than be thrown by a horse.

The incident reminded me of an old T.V. movie with Carrie Fisher and John Ritter. He ends up paralyzed from a polo accident and becomes solitary and embittered. Princess, um..sorry, Carrie Fisher ends up finally breaking down his barriers and in the end becomes his girlfriend.

I remember how hard it was to watch that movie, because the Ritter I knew up till then was always so full of life.
Now he's gone to...
I need a drink.

Thanks so much, Linda, for saying it just how it sounded in my head. Reeve took the entirely crappy circumstances life threw at him and spent the rest of his life as a fighter, recognising that his fame was both a gift and kind of a responsibility, too.

I'd been wondering why this was resonating so familiarly with me, and you've made me realise that my other Christopher Reeve was Elizabeth Glaser and her advocacy for AIDS patients.

I was another one who really wanted to believe that Reeve would walk again one day. I feel lost and sad knowing that he didn't.

Maybe the sheer relief of having the charges dropped made him come off as sounding a little bit more conciliatory than his lawyer might have thought prudent, but who knows?

I'm glad it's over too. Just so fucking sick of hearing about it.

My advice to women? Stay the hell away from professional athletes. Period.

I think it makes sense, in the context of everything. I think he probably has felt bad this entire time, and if you read his entire statement, it seems like he has been communicating with her in some form (whether through lawyers or what, I don't know).

Anyway, the statement actually made me like him more (which might be the point), although it surprised me, too. Couldn't they retry him using that statement, even though she has said she won't use the statement in the civil trial?

I believe the dismissal was with prejudice, meaning he can't be re-tried. I'm also willing to wager the statement was an aspect of an already negotiated settlement of the civil suit. Perhaps not, but that's my guess-- I highly doubt he'd make that statement if there was any uncertainty about the status of the civil suit.

I too am glad to see this coming to an end.

I thought the same thing, PB, after I posted this -- that he never would have said that if he didn't already know the outcome of the civil suit, because whether they can retry him or not, that comment would create major problems in the civil suit.

I agree with everyone that one way or another, it's good to have it over. My only concern is that I'm kind of creeped out about her deciding not to participate after the court kept fucking up and releasing her name and address over and over again. I don't mind if she dropped it because she chose to on her own terms, either because she was wrong or because she chose to just get on with her life (I mean, you could debate that all day, but there you go), but if she dropped it because crazy threatening assholes were ruining her life, that's very bothersome. It's hard to know how to react.

I think PoolBoy nailed it. They reached a monetary settlement. He wasn't going to pay unless the charges were dropped, so she refused to testify. But she wanted some level of public vindication, so they agreed to that weak, mealy-mouthed apology which basically says, "I thought it was consensual, but understand that you may feel that it wasn't." Which makes no sense. Consenual sex is or it isn't.

The civil case is apparently "going forward" but I guarantee you terms have been reached. No one is going to be deposed, etc. The final agreement will contain the mother of all confidentiality terms. The only reason they don't announce the settlement terms of the civil case is that they don't want to make it look obvious that she is being bought.

From my perspective, it makes her story less believable, not more. If she was right, she could have gotten the conviction, money, and true public vindication. Instead, she took the money, her alleged rapist won't see the inside of a jail cell, and she'll never be able to tell her side of the story.

That Pool Boy, he's a smart one.

I think what especially throws me is the tense he used: "I truly believe" it was consensual. Seems to me that "believed" is the only word that even remotely makes sense in that sentence, and the past tense would cover his ass just as well legally. If she didn't think she was consenting, dude, it wasn't consensual. The legal issue, of course, is whether he believed at the time that she was consenting. His use of the present tense just makes it: I understand she didn't think she was consenting, but I know she totally did.

I find it interesting that they had to go to a fast food restaurant to find a phone. No land lines OR cell phones in the apartment?

My other thoughts were:

I wonder where he 'squeezed' her.

and

I suppose he's lucky they were only kissing when she decided to exact revenge.

Ah, just too many jokes to be made....

I hope her name is Kathryn, so that when someone asks, he can legitimately reply in the affirmative to "Kat got your tongue?"

Yeah, like I already don't have enough fear of women.

I am sitting here at one in the morning, laughing so hard I woke the cat up. That's almost as good as the story where the woman got so mad at her boyfriend she snatched the balls clean off his body and when the doctor was asked about the prognosis for recovery, he said, "In a case like this, generally, it's goodbye, Charlie." GOODBYE, CHARLIE, I tell you. Oh, man, I needed that laugh.

Agreed. It's like... THE mother of all wrong words. It wouldn't matter how angry I was with someone... I know that I couldn't bring myself to ever take it to the "c-word" level.

>>>She was asked, "Can you indicate any polite context in which that word would be used?"

Hoffman answered, "Yes, I've actually heard it used as a term of endearment."

Hmmm.... I wonder how it would turn out if people started calling Ms. Hoffman that word with a nice smile on their face... CU is a freaking embarrassment and continues to set new lows in integrity.

Yeah, but it's about the verbal proclivities of athletes. Althletes, the British, and Quentin Tarantino can make anything into a term of endearment... or a slur, come to think of it.

In the context of the real world, here and now, yes -- that's the granddaddy of nasty words. And there is clearly something very much messed up about CU and its culture.

But have ya SEEN 'Kill Bill Vol. 2?' There is a way. Hoffman at CU is probably blowing smoke, and she's all the stuff you guys say, but she's not necessarily empirically wrong. Now, how much that matters, I don't know. And I seriously doubt the silly bint (Medieval Studies guru or not) has the chops to make it work. And she should most definitely know better. But there is... a way.

I'm reluctant to be absolutist about words that can NEVER be used -- it confers a kind of magical power that actually gives them more power, if you follow me. And the whole thing is undermined in this case because she's so clearly under orders to cover the university's ass. But there may be a time for it.

(Example: a friend who's a nurse told me of a time when he was supervising a shift of nurses, and found that one of them was deliberately neglecting and giving substandard care to a patient who was HIV-positive. When he asked her about that, she said "Well, those people are sinners and deserve to die anyway." He brought out the c-word on her then, for the only time in his life he told me, and I think he was justified.)

I wouldn't use the "C" word in that situation, though. I'd use the word "suspended."

I use to really hate the C-Word, but then I started using it more, and I kinda like it now. Mainly, I use it around my friends who feel equally de-sensitized to it. I do understand that it can be highly offensive to others, so I refrain from using it in the presence of and directed against those who are not so comfortable with the word.

But really, it is a good word. Just say it a couple of times to yourself while on the toilet or something. It can be quite liberating.

The best part of that article is this:
"But, the spokesperson said, because Hoffman is a medieval scholar, she is aware of the long history of the word. She said it was not always a negative term."
You've got to love when people whip things like that out as a defense. Etymology is one thing (though I'd personally love to hear the historical context for the c-word). But, for example, 'negro' wasn't always a historically negative term either but that doesn't mean you'd want to attempt to justify using it in 2004!

--- I'd personally love to hear the historical context for the c-word ---

'kay.

from http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A753527 :

"...The word has Germanic cognates including old Norse (kunta), middle-Dutch (Kunte) and possibly High German (Kotze meaning prostitute), which all point to a pre-historic germanic ancestor kunton. A Latin word, Kuntus, meaning wedge, might also have been an influence. The word would appear to have entered the English language during the early Middle Ages; in 1230AD, both Oxford and London boasted districts called 'Gropecunte Lane', in reference to the prostitutes that worked there. The Oxford lane was later renamed the slightly less-contentious Magpie Lane, while London's version retained a sense of euphemism when it was changed to 'Threadneedle Street'."

I never would call a woman that word to her face, or say it in front of a woman, but I will use it with men to describe a woman, but only if b***h or a**hole just do not seem strong enough to suit the horrid behavior I witnessed or was subject to. Oddly, my 60ish women therapist once used it to describe a former girlfriend of mine when I continued to obsess about the emotional harm she did me ten or so years ago. I believe the quote was, "Get over it, she was a ..." Also, I recently saw a clip from something on British TV where they asked TV stars what their favorite swear words are. The actress who plays Donna on the West Wing, Miss Alli's very favorite show, used that word with great relish.

I made "women therapist" plural. I know. Idiot. Well, ast least your not as fascist about these things as Sars.

I can't defend the use of the word as a slur or label, but when used as a sexual term in intimate situations, it can be quite powerful and dirty in a nice way.

In terms of using it to describe someONE, well, yeah, I've never heard it used in anything but a horribly offensive context.

I'm kind of torn about this word - my feminism is at war with my love of swearing. Have you read "C***", by Inga Muscio? It's got a lot of interesting material about the history of the word and its potential. I use it in an anatomical sense, but also use it as a swear word. Either way, I think it's a shame that it has this totemic quality as the ultimate bad word. However, I'm Australian, and I think it's considered slightly less offensive here than it is in the US.

Yeah, I don't use it. Well, except with specific reference to Ann Coulter. I mean, what else could you call her?